Survivalism & Self Sufficiency Topics > COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic

Coronavirus COVID-19 (a.k.a. 2019-nCoV) outbreak in China

<< < (278/279) > >>

It is time for politicians to stop using the coronavirus to advance their ideology and listen to the real scientists.  This means ending all lockdowns of healthy people and making the proven hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, dextromethorphan, and spike insertion antibody therapies broadly available.  Hiding in a basement and allowing China to take control of world economy is not a policy that benefits the American people or the world.
Coronavirus: Health experts join global anti-lockdown movement

Thousands of scientists and health experts have joined a global movement warning of "grave concerns" about Covid-19 lockdown policies.

Nearly 6,000 experts, including dozens from the UK, say the approach is having a devastating impact on physical and mental health as well as society.

They are calling for protection to be focused on the vulnerable, while healthy people get on with their lives.
And the declaration has now been signed by nearly 6,000 scientists and medical experts across the globe as well as 50,000 members of the public.

The UK-based experts who have signed it include:

Dr Sunetra Gupta, an epidemiologist at Oxford University
Nottingham University self-harm expert Prof Ellen Townsend
Edinburgh University disease modeller Dr Paul McKeigue

They say keeping the lockdown policies in place until a vaccine is available would cause "irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed".

The health harms cited include:

lower childhood vaccination rates
worsening care for heart disease and cancer patients

And they point out the risk from coronavirus is 1,000 times greater for the old and infirm, with children more at risk from flu than Covid-19.

David in MN:
We're going to double the number of acutely starving people globally to ~260 million in 2020 based only on the stoppage of international trade and increased supply chain costs.

That's not the people who are "food insecure". That's acute hunger. The charities I've worked with in the past are already starting to really hurt.

I sincerely hope that decades from now the history books don't read that in 2020 half a million North Americans and Europeans died in a tragic disease while 100 million children starved globally in their response.


--- Quote from: iam4liberty on July 30, 2020, 06:13:15 PM ---
Hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, remdesivir: ‘Desperation science’ slows the hunt for coronavirus solutions

--- End quote ---

The third "desperation science" treatment also has been proved effective
Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report


A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan–Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%).

Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 number, NCT04280705. opens in new tab.)

David in MN:
I'm going to harp on the math a little again. I'm a little miffed that death numbers during a pandemic are being politicized and I'm (in my mind) rightfully pissed off. We live in a time where ~200,000 deaths is simultaneously touted by both parties because (presumably) were Hillary Clinton our president the death count would be 0 and had it not been for the measures Trump took there would have been 2.2 million deaths (from the Ferguson model).

This is right BS on both counts. Show me any country, with any response, normalized for age and we're playing in the margin of error. Yes, you might do better in Germany than Belgium but take Europe on average and it's about the same as the States. Similarly, we make a massive data error in claiming that Africa hasn't been hit as hard because life expectancy in Africa tops at 65 for females (62 for males) so the most "at risk" people aren't alive. That's not a sign of success but more an indicator that we haven't figured out how to keep Africans alive in the first place. That should give us pause when organizations like Brookings tell us we have a lot to learn from Africa regarding COVID.

Last, I'll once again harp on the data being shared. One could paint whatever picture one wants provided the ability to intertwine case rate with death rate using data skewed based on very small testing. Have our responses worked? Who knows? We certainly won't put up a chart that coincides policy changes with death rate to figure out which policy had the effect of turning a power function linear. COVID has entered the dreaded realm of quantitative easing. If the policy doesn't work we just need more of it.

I'm seeing an increasing number of people Not wearing masks in stores, or getting take-out. There is a city ordinance requiring them. The stores have signs posted, whether there is an ordinance there or not, but still, less masks.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version